Science? What Science?

Professor Mojib Latif of the Liebniz Institute is a leading climate researcher. He is one of the major authors of the UN’s International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Five Year Reports that declared global warming to be definitely caused by man and that this is a serious threat to the planet.

Latif is one of the leading climate modellers in the world. He is the recipient of several international climate-study prizes and a lead author for the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). He has contributed significantly to the IPCC’s last two five-year reports that have stated unequivocally that man-made greenhouse emissions are causing the planet to warm dangerously.

Yet last week in Geneva, at the UN’s World Climate Conference–an annual gathering of the so-called “scientific consensus” on man-made climate change –Latif conceded the Earth has not warmed for nearly a decade and that we are likely entering “one or even two decades during which temperatures cool.”

This is major news, but no one is reporting it. So far, the vast majority of articles are from outside the U.S.

While this isn’t the “about face” that Newsbusters and the Calgary Herald are claiming, it certainly throws doubt on the idea that scientists can accurately predict the future of the Earth’s climate. They failed to recognize the cooling period. Some even claimed the last ten yearswere a warmingtrend, despiteevidence to the contrary.

Meanwhile, sunspotminimums and maximums have been shown to be more closely related to the Earth’s temperature that atmospheric CO2 levels.

Despite the vast number of scientists who question the concept of Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW), we continue to move forward with stringent, costly measure to reduce “greenhouse gas” emissions.

The problem is not that Anthropogenic Global Warming is or is not happening. The problem is that the research, no matter who has developed it, is suspect. In every case, the researcher knows from where the money paying for their research comes. This can cause bias in the researcher’s hypothesis and testing.

Double-blind studies, like those done by pharmaceuticals manufacturers to prove their drugs are effective and safe, are needed. Despite Michael Chricton’s repeated requests for such studies, which he finally wrote into his scathing 2004 global warming skeptic novel State of Fear, no double-blind evidence has been produced.

In other words, all evidence, no matter whether it points to global warming or global cooling, is suspect. No one really knows what is going on with climate, because no one has examined the evidence from a truly blind, purely scientific perspective. People set out either to prove or disprove the science, predetermining that CO2 or sunspots are the culprit and ignoring millions of complicating input factors entirely.

The question that needs to be asked is not, “Is CO2 warming the planet,” but rather, “The planet’s temperature is higher than it was 160 years ago. What caused this?”

In other words, the billions of dollars spent on climate research are largely a waste. There are too many preconceived notions being injected.